Ioannis Psallidas

Malignant pleural mesothelioma is an aggressive malignancy of the pleural surface, predominantly caused by prior asbestos exposure. There is a global epidemic of malignant pleural mesothelioma underway, and incidence rates are predicted to peak in the next few years.This article summarises the epidemiology and pathogenesis of malignant pleural mesothelioma, before describing some key factors in the patient experience and outlining common symptoms. Diagnostic approaches are reviewed, including imaging techniques and the role of various biomarkers. Treatment options are summarised, including the importance of palliative care and methods of controlling pleural effusions. The evidence for chemotherapy, radiotherapy and surgery is reviewed, both in the palliative setting and in the context of trimodality treatment. An algorithm for managing malignant pleural effusion in malignant pleural mesothelioma patients is presented. Finally new treatment developments and novel therapeutic approaches are summarised.

Malignant pleural effusions (MPE) are a common pathology, treated by respiratory physicians and thoracic surgeons alike. In recent years, several well-designed randomised clinical trials have been published that have changed the landscape of MPE management. The European Respiratory Society (ERS) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) established a multidisciplinary collaboration of clinicians with expertise in the management of MPE with the aim of producing a comprehensive review of the scientific literature.Six areas of interest were identified, including the optimum management of symptomatic MPE, management of trapped lung in MPE, management of loculated MPE, prognostic factors in MPE, whether there is a role for oncological therapies prior to intervention for MPE and whether a histological diagnosis is always required in MPE.The literature revealed that talc pleurodesis and indwelling pleural catheters effectively manage the symptoms of MPE. There was limited evidence regarding the management of trapped lung or loculated MPE. The LENT score was identified as a validated tool for predicting survival in MPE, with Brims' prognostic score demonstrating utility in mesothelioma prognostication. There was no evidence to support the use of oncological therapies as an alternative to MPE drainage, and the literature supported the use of tissue biopsy as the gold standard for diagnosis and treatment planning.

Malignant pleural effusion (MPE) is a common but serious condition that is related with poor quality of life, morbidity and mortality. Its incidence and associated healthcare costs are rising and its management remains palliative, with median survival ranging from 3 to 12 months. During the last decade there has been significant progress in unravelling the pathophysiology of MPE, as well as its diagnostics, imaging, and management. Nowadays, formerly bed-ridden patients are genotyped, phenotyped, and treated on an ambulatory basis. This article attempts to provide a comprehensive overview of current advances in MPE from bench to bedside. In addition, it highlights unanswered questions in current clinical practice and suggests future directions for basic and clinical research in the field.

BACKGROUND: Malignant pleural effusion affects more than 750,000 persons each year across Europe and the United States. Pleurodesis with the administration of talc in hospitalized patients is the most common treatment, but indwelling pleural catheters placed for drainage offer an ambulatory alternative. We examined whether talc administered through an indwelling pleural catheter was more effective at inducing pleurodesis than the use of an indwelling pleural catheter alone. METHODS: Over a period of 4 years, we recruited patients with malignant pleural effusion at 18 centers in the United Kingdom. After the insertion of an indwelling pleural catheter, patients underwent drainage regularly on an outpatient basis. If there was no evidence of substantial lung entrapment (nonexpandable lung, in which lung expansion and pleural apposition are not possible because of visceral fibrosis or bronchial obstruction) at 10 days, patients were randomly assigned to receive either 4 g of talc slurry or placebo through the indwelling pleural catheter on an outpatient basis. Talc or placebo was administered on a single-blind basis. Follow-up lasted for 70 days. The primary outcome was successful pleurodesis at day 35 after randomization. RESULTS: The target of 154 patients undergoing randomization was reached after 584 patients were approached. At day 35, a total of 30 of 69 patients (43%) in the talc group had successful pleurodesis, as compared with 16 of 70 (23%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 2.20; 95% confidence interval, 1.23 to 3.92; P=0.008). No significant between-group differences in effusion size and complexity, number of inpatient days, mortality, or number of adverse events were identified. No significant excess of blockages of the indwelling pleural catheter was noted in the talc group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients without substantial lung entrapment, the outpatient administration of talc through an indwelling pleural catheter for the treatment of malignant pleural effusion resulted in a significantly higher chance of pleurodesis at 35 days than an indwelling catheter alone, with no deleterious effects. (Funded by Becton Dickinson; EudraCT number, 2012-000599-40 .).

The European Respiratory Society (ERS)/European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS)/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) task force brought together experts to update previous 2009 ERS/ESTS guidelines on management of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), a rare cancer with globally poor outcome, after a systematic review of the 2009–2018 literature. The evidence was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. The evidence syntheses were discussed and recommendations formulated by this multidisciplinary group of experts. Diagnosis: pleural biopsies remain the gold standard to confirm the diagnosis, usually obtained by thoracoscopy but occasionally via image-guided percutaneous needle biopsy in cases of pleural symphysis or poor performance status. Pathology: standard staining procedures are insufficient in ∼10% of cases, justifying the use of specific markers, including BAP-1 and CDKN2A ( p16 ) for the separation of atypical mesothelial proliferation from MPM. Staging: in the absence of a uniform, robust and validated staging system, we advise using the most recent 2016 8th TNM (tumour, node, metastasis) classification, with an algorithm for pre-therapeutic assessment. Monitoring: patient's performance status, histological subtype and tumour volume are the main prognostic factors of clinical importance in routine MPM management. Other potential parameters should be recorded at baseline and reported in clinical trials. Treatment: (chemo)therapy has limited efficacy in MPM patients and only selected patients are candidates for radical surgery. New promising targeted therapies, immunotherapies and strategies have been reviewed. Because of limited data on the best combination treatment, we emphasise that patients who are considered candidates for a multimodal approach, including radical surgery, should be treated as part of clinical trials in MPM-dedicated centres.